justdaveisfine@piefed.social to Gaming@lemmy.worldEnglish · 8 days agoA cold take on balancingmedia.piefed.socialexternal-linkmessage-square17fedilinkarrow-up1114arrow-down15
arrow-up1109arrow-down1external-linkA cold take on balancingmedia.piefed.socialjustdaveisfine@piefed.social to Gaming@lemmy.worldEnglish · 8 days agomessage-square17fedilink
minus-squareDreamButt@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up14·8 days agoare these not the same just changing who’s good vs what?
minus-squarePeruvian_Skies@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up16·7 days agoIn the first panel, each class is considered in its interactions with each other class. In the second, each class is strong against one, weak against one and their relationship with the others isn’t considered.
minus-squareDreamButt@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·7 days agoI read it as the adjacent ones being neutral or a 50:50 odds. But it sounds like ur interpretation might be the intention
are these not the same just changing who’s good vs what?
In the first panel, each class is considered in its interactions with each other class. In the second, each class is strong against one, weak against one and their relationship with the others isn’t considered.
I read it as the adjacent ones being neutral or a 50:50 odds. But it sounds like ur interpretation might be the intention